Creationists are liars' (?): Geologist Donald Prothero doesnt like the fact that we dont agree with his ideas on evolution.

I love the attitude some evolutionists have toward professional, scientific debate. Because creationist scientists do not agree with their biased, subjective and unsubstantiated ideas they spit the dummy and call us liars.

The latest tirade from geologist Donald Prothero is in an opinion piece in NewScientist entitled ‘Evolution: What missing link?’1 I like that title.

His article was picked up by the Telegraph newspaper in the UK which reported, ‘Creationists “peddle lies about the fossil record”.’2

Lies? Are creationists really lying?

No!

It’s just that Prothero does not like the fact that we don’t agree with his ideas. It upsets him so much that he describes creationists in this way: ...

I guess the evolutionists will find out who is telling the truth the moment they die. By then, however, it will be too late to change their minds. Their fate will have been sealed for eternity. I don't take any pleasure in that, but that is reality.

THis may be somewhat out of context, but I watched a show the other night called “The Evidence,” and it took a scientific look at responding to critics of Christianity. As a geologist myself, I understand the scientific view point that if you can’t watch it, observe it, quantify it, measure it, submit it to physical tests, it can’t be called scientists.

Then these folks started talking about consciousness. I asked a friend who believes in evolution, and I said, if this is all just chance, I am, by dumb luck a person instead of rock. There is no reason I should not have been a gabbro instead of a human. He seemed to agree.

And especially on the cosmological view that all matter of the universe was initially combined into a small volume, and upon the Big Bang, matter disassembled, assembled, evolved, some matter became rocks, some water, some animals, some trees.

No one knows how inanimate matter came to have life. There are a lot of so-called theories, but nothing more than “this may produce amino acids that may lead to cell building.”

But even more confounding, and not explainable by scientists, is consciousness. Science cannot explain consciousness. That is a pretty serious thing, it is the reason we even think about what we do, or study science in the first place. So, the pre-imminent reason science came to exist, human consciousness, cannot be explained by science.

It just seems paradoxical for a scientist to discard a theory based on the fact that it cannot be defined by the scientific method.

Unfortunately there are people on both sides of the argument who simply can’t bear to live with the idea that the other side exists. However I think the greatest number are those who are fine with the beliefes of the others as long as we’re free to believe what we want.

Personally I’m one of those who believes in directed evolution of mankind. (Christian evolutionist) We’re clearly different than any other creature on the planet and even very distinct from the creatures most similar to us.

Yep. case in point. The member of the Dover School who made a solemn deposition that he had no idea where the money to buy the cdesign proponentist book Pandas Thumb came from. When it was discovered that it came from his personal cheque account, his excuse was that he misspoke because he was hepped up on goofballs.

You may choose to believe him

24
posted on 11/19/2009 4:17:27 PM PST
by Oztrich Boy
(Life is a tragedy for those who feel, but a comedy to those who think. - Horace Walpole)

I have always thought that ones eternity in Hell was predicated on the rejection of Jesus Christ as the Son of God, not a belief or disbelief in evolution. If other errors in belief are acceptable as something that would condemn one to Hell wouldnt a belief in Santa Clause or the Easter Bunny also qualify? Just ask’n

26
posted on 11/19/2009 4:20:21 PM PST
by doc1019
(Obama, not so much.)

I have always thought that ones eternity in Hell was predicated on the rejection of Jesus Christ as the Son of God, not a belief or disbelief in evolution. If other errors in belief are acceptable as something that would condemn one to Hell wouldnt a belief in Santa Clause or the Easter Bunny also qualify? Just ask’n

27
posted on 11/19/2009 4:21:07 PM PST
by doc1019
(Obama, not so much.)

Let’s suppose for a moment that an individual Creationist or an IDer did lie, should that invalidate the argument from Creation/ID? If so, does this same standard apply to evolution with respect to all the liars and frauds that have plagued the evo-camp all these years?

That’s fine and its very common among scientists to disagree on various points. Good science is not consesus science. (Why global warming science is junk BTW)

In my opinion its very interesting that creation and the big bang theory mesh so well. However the big bang theory has some big holes in it that simply can’t be explained away. I attribute those holes to God.

It just seems that every time we get to the real picky litte answers we run into the unexplainable and I think there’s a reason for that.

Lets suppose for a moment that an individual Creationist or an IDer did lie, should that invalidate the argument from Creation/ID? If so, does this same standard apply to evolution with respect to all the liars and frauds that have plagued the evo-camp all these years?

Aren't we being implicitly asked by the author to judge all the scientific evidence and theories on the basis of one man having unfairly accused creationists of lying?

31
posted on 11/19/2009 4:32:33 PM PST
by tacticalogic
("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)

“I know I left a billion data points of evidence that all pointed to a billions of years old universe and the gradual development of modern species over eons; and I know you accepted Jesus into your heart and asked for forgiveness in his name, but if ONLY you had ALSO accepted a literal interpretation of Genesis.... too bad... Hell for you.”

If there theological position wasn't so hateful and ignorant it might actually be funny.

32
posted on 11/19/2009 4:35:11 PM PST
by allmendream
(Wealth is EARNED not distributed, so how could it be RE-distributed?)

The evos are still conducting keyword attacks on Creation/ID threads after both sides were told to knock it off. We are holding up our end of the bargain, and yet the evos persist. If you look in the keyword section of this post, you will find:

I believe that Gods word never pushed the issue because it was immaterial in his overall plan for Mans salvation. Believe in evolution if you must, or Creationism if you must neither has much to do with ones salvation in the long run. Gods word doesnt say that the only way to heaven is through Jesus and a belief in creationism (or evolution), just a belief in Jesus as God. (By the way, Im a young earth creationist). ;-)

35
posted on 11/19/2009 4:39:52 PM PST
by doc1019
(Obama, not so much.)

Actaully, that is a standard tactic among evos...and you don’t have to go any further than FR to see regularly employed. But if you do go beyond FR, you will find that the evos on FR learned this tactic from the high priests of the Temple of Darwin (such as the evo geologist mentioned in this very article).

An interesting feature of the cladogram in the article is that it depicts organisms splitting into just two lines, the original disappearing. But why would an ancestor of humans and apes for example, not split into humans, apes, and a dozen other creatures instead of just two?

42
posted on 11/19/2009 4:46:38 PM PST
by count-your-change
(You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)

God speaks in parables. That is how he instructs, for a parable has variable meaning and almost unlimited applicability. There need not have actually been one ‘good Samaritan’ who did those things for Jesus to instruct us with the parable of the good Samaritan.

Just as with the description of the ‘Molten Sea’. God could have said that the thing was 10 cubits across exactly, 30 cubits exactly, and exactly round all about. But that would be incorrect. Instead he just said it was 10 cubits across, round all about and 30 cubits across. Those that try to derive Pi from such will be left disappointed. I think there is much to be seen in that fact alone. God could not have said more directly “THIS IS NOT A MATH BOOK”, and yet people want to depend upon it for their models of Geology, Biology, and Geocentricity.

But glad to hear a voice of reason on the YEC side. Salvation is never said in the Bible to be dependent upon your beliefs about how the physical world came to be.

43
posted on 11/19/2009 4:47:42 PM PST
by allmendream
(Wealth is EARNED not distributed, so how could it be RE-distributed?)

A cladogram depicts a branch point as a speciation event, where two populations diverged. A speciation event is where a subpopulation branches off, or a species becomes divided and starts to diverge, thus two branches.

And the Ape clade went six different directions at different times and places (six that survived as independent breeding populations); humans, chimps and bonobo-chimps, gorillas, orangutans and gibbons.

49
posted on 11/19/2009 4:54:42 PM PST
by allmendream
(Wealth is EARNED not distributed, so how could it be RE-distributed?)

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.